About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
is not for life. but everybody who signed the pledge, including peter king who tried to weasel out of it, shame on him as the new york sun said today, i hope his wife understands that commitments last a little longer than, than, than two years or something. >> and zoraida, there you have grover norquist -- >> weeks. >> -- of course, from the americans for tax reform throwing out some pretty strong political hyperbole. but the fact of the matter is, as you said, fiscal cliff, 35 days away, and as we've heard from a lot of economists, if congress can't fix this, then we're in a lot of trouble. we can be heading back into recession. >> mark preston live in washington, d.c. thank you for that. so even if democrats and republicans get a spending deal done in time to steer clear of the fiscal cliff, derer thompson says it won't necessarily cure the economy. the senior editor of "the atlantic" joins us live in the next half hour. he has an interesting perspective. >>> ambassador susan rice heads to capitol hill this morning to mend fences with three republican senators. john mccain, lindsey graham and
've had some tough things to say about congressman peter king, for example. his comments about the pledge. but look specifically to his point. some things do change over the years, the economic problems, for example, that we may have had 20 years ago, 40 years ago, they're different than the economic problems right now. so don't different problems call for different solutions? >> well, what was odd about peter king's comment was look, tax increases slow economic growth. tax increases take resources out of the real economy and allow the government to grow and grow. that's always a bad idea. that's not a good idea some years and a bad idea others. leeches, doctors don't put leeches on people ever, it's wrong. don't do it. it doesn't make people stronger. raising taxes, taking money out of the economy, damages the economy, kills jobs, reduces opportunities. >> you know, the latest cnn polls that just came out this week say you're wrong. two or three americans, including a majority of republicans, say the fiscal cliff should be addressed with a mix, a mix of spending cuts, yes, but also tax i
there and turns out times change. peter king is also saying he's going to go against the pledge who agreed to it years and years and his reasoning that times have changed. here is the caviat . you are a republican and don't want to raise taxes and willing to compromise a bit, the democrats have to compromise with entitlement spending there. is a way here to find common ground and get away from the all or nothing pledges that the american public many of them were upset about the grid lock. >> brian: it is all symbolic. that brings 80 billion a year and would pay ian volving credit but it doesn't touch our deficit or balance our budget and the other thing that is important they have to get something in return. we'll put it up on the clinton rates and not touch medicare or medicaid? it is all part of the deal. >> gretchen: once you get people back to the table. it is it like a marriage, marriages don't work when one party said i will not budge on anything. >> brian: i hope my wife is listening. >> steve: we are in the let's make a deal stage. both sides want to appear flexibility when it come
have been cracking this door a little bit. peter king said over the weekend for instance if i was in congress in 1941 with refrpbl reference to the pledge you made i would have signed a war against japan. i'm not going to attack japan today. the world has changed and the economic situation is different. that from peter kin. about is make it clear, what raising revenues and not tax rates. just on the surface, why do you believe that the door is starting to crack a little bit? why are republicans talking this way? >> two things, the people who are saying that they might vote for a tax increase that bush got talked into in 1990 for return for make believe spending cuts are the same people who said this two years ago, this is a complete media-created frenzy. peter king said this two years ago, lindsey graham said this two years ago. chamblis of georgia said this two years ago. they said all these things all during the negotiations where they tried to undermine where john boehner and mitch mcconnell got 2.5 trillion in spending cuts without a dollar than tax increase and those peop
the other saxby chambliss, lindsey graham, bob corker, peter king, they're willing to break the grover norquist pledge and consider new revenue. is this really anything new? >> no. all right. next question? first of all they're not saying anything new first of all. they're not saying we're willing to talk about rates -- >> bill: in fact they're saying they'll vote against rates -- getting rid of the bush tax cuts. >> this is not a change in policy at all. that's number one. number two these are -- senate republicans who don't have a lot of influence in this particular subject area. they're not the most -- they're not the biggest players. third, they're senate republicans. we need house republicans to change their minds. so i said this in my blog yesterday, this is not as significant as it seems and all of those who made such a big deal about it over the weekend are missing the key point. it is not a change in policy and two, look who it is. it is not that important. when i see some tea party switching and eric canto
nation. i certainly want to thank also chairman peter king also and, of course, my good friend, michael mccaul, chairman mccaul, for being one of the original co-sponsors, along with mr. farenthold. a new member from the bounceville area, mr. faleomavaega, who always worked in a bipartisan way. the jamie zapata, this 915, has received bipartisan support in may when it was first passed by the house. it was overwhelmingly supported by the house. both democrats and republicans. went over to the senate and certainly i want to thank, also, senator lieberman and senator collins for the support of this bill. senator lieberman was outstanding in making sure we move this as quickly as possible. we have a bill that does two things. first things, enhances border security. and number two is to flame this particular bill in honor of a brave individual that jamie zapata that has given up his life. i know some months ago both chairman mccaul and i had the opportunity to meet with the family, with the mother and father of this strong hero that we got to know in the service of the line of duty. as you k
, saxby chambliss lindsey graham, peter king, bob corker is the other one who said we're not bound by this. we don't feel we're bound by this pledge anymore. chuck schumer yesterday dan indicating that this -- he sees this as a good sign. >> republicans in both the house and senate are deciding they no longer want to be married to this pledge. republicans are saying they want a divorce from grover norquist. that alone is a leading indicator that the fiscal deal is within reach. both sides are still far apart. the discussions over the next few weeks will be difficult but with each new republican disavowing grover norquist, the chances of a deal rises sharply. >> bill: daniella, is grover over? >> oh, please, lord, let it be true! you know, i think so. there was a funny thing politico arena they ask these questions every day. one of the questions a couple of days ago was is grover norquist's reign over. the first person who responded was grover norquist. no. republicans are -- blah, blah, blah. >> bill: he says his
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7